CIA has shills on usenet/A few posing as "UFO Debunkers!"
Dr. Richard X. Frager
on usenet. If they see that you post dissenting
opinions you may find yourself getting little
"friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
with you. Later you might find offers from this
person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
Be careful! They like nothing better than to
entrap people by getting you to ask for some
classified information so they can then bust
you.
Another tack is outright threatening email by
some "nut" (often from an AOL or anon
account) telling you to shut up or else bad
things will happen.
Other times the email will be more
concilliatory, trying to convince you that
it's a waste of time to show up the shills
on the newsgroups.
It's almost funny that people not on the
net have no idea the ideological games
their government plays on usenet. It
would be funny if it wasn't such a
disgrace. :(
Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents,
and they have been exposed by some excellent investigative work by
certain members of this newsgroup.
My deepest respect goes out to these brave individuals who have flushed
out the "spooks" and humanity owes each and every one of you a hearty
thank-you!
Louis Nick III
>The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>on usenet. If they see that you post dissenting
>opinions you may find yourself getting little
>"friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
>with you. Later you might find offers from this
>person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
>
>Be careful! They like nothing better than to
>entrap people by getting you to ask for some
>classified information so they can then bust
>you.
Oh, yeah, think of all those who have posted classified info to the net!
There goes our best tactic, Dean!
>Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents,
>and they have been exposed by some excellent investigative work by
>certain members of this newsgroup.
Yup, we've been showed up good. Well, I hope they don't cut this great
pay I've been getting.
>My deepest respect goes out to these brave individuals who have flushed
>out the "spooks" and humanity owes each and every one of you a hearty
>thank-you! ^^^^^^^^
Yeah, we government "shills" are ANTI-HUMANITY!
--
"If an atomic-powered taxi hit an atomic-powered streetcar at Forty-second
and Lex, it could completely destroy the whole Grand Central area."
John W. Campbell Jr.
Louis Nick III sn...@u.washington.edu alt.religion.louis-nick
Mark
>
> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
> on usenet.
I think the CIA has more important things to do than "hang out" on usenet
looking to entrap ufo buffs by getting them to ask for classified info.
Mark
dire...@nota.spy.org
>The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
<yadda, yadda...>
>My deepest respect goes out to these brave individuals who have flushed
>out the "spooks" and humanity owes each and every one of you a hearty
>thank-you!
You have hereby been awarded another "Area 51 Theater" ribbon (Third
Saucer Cluster) for your valiant assistance in the fight against the
hideously evil purveyors of Skepticism. Your constant vigilance in
the face of stiff- nay, *overwhelming*- odds is a constant reminder
to your admiring public of the effort required to perpetuate the Holy
Myths.
With this award comes the offer of 7 days freedom from harrassment by
those imaginary legions from acronym-named organizations that seek to
discredit you. Your paranioa should like that! All ya gotta to do is
let me in on who leaked...... Oh, but you know what I mean! I'm
*sure* we can work something out....
A Friend
P.S. This is classified: Revelation of this offer may result in
revokation of your Merit Badges, or *worse*!
David J. Helland
>
> opinions you may find yourself getting little
> "friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
> with you. Later you might find offers from this
> person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
>
> Be careful! They like nothing better than to
> entrap people by getting you to ask for some
> classified information so they can then bust
> you.
>
> some "nut" (often from an AOL or anon
> account) telling you to shut up or else bad
> things will happen.
>
> Other times the email will be more
> concilliatory, trying to convince you that
> it's a waste of time to show up the shills
> on the newsgroups.
>
> It's almost funny that people not on the
> net have no idea the ideological games
> their government plays on usenet. It
> would be funny if it wasn't such a
> disgrace. :(
>
> and they have been exposed by some excellent investigative work by
> certain members of this newsgroup.
> out the "spooks" and humanity owes each and every one of you a hearty
BETTER TO DO than bother folks that have interesting posts.
Blacklight HeadQuarters
<rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
Forgive me if I find it hard to beleive that the US Government is
sitting some where reading thousands of posts from hundreds of
newsgroups. How many UFO newsgroups are there? I certainly am not
going to post some "Classified" document on the newsgroup or on the
net, just free as a bird. I don't think any other intelligent
individual would post such documents here or anywhere. If they do
then they have stepped into something they don't understand. Bets
wishes to them. Everyone seems to think from alt.binaries.whatever to
alt.ufo.whatever that the FBI, CIA, NSA, SS, etc. has nothing better
to do than monitor newsgroups or hire spooks to read all the post and
let them know. Hmmmm, according to what you have said I guess I could
easily fall into that catagory as a "spook". On the contrary, you
would probably faint if you knew what I knew. The "spooks" are out
there but I doubt they are on the newsgroups as in depth as you say.
Thank you for the warning and as I post I will keep the information in
mind even if it is far in the back. Thanks again and I hope to hear a
replay.
Logan
BlackLight HQ
Cluster User
>Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>
>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>> on usenet.
>
>I think the CIA has more important things to do than "hang out" on usenet
>looking to entrap ufo buffs by getting them to ask for classified info.
>
>Mark
I think you are right. That is really the NSA's job.
j...@alden.com
cklight HeadQuarters) writes:
:>
:>On 7 Apr 1996 06:23:27 GMT, "Dr. Richard X. Frager":>>on usenet. If they see that you post dissenting
:>>opinions you may find yourself getting little
:>>"friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
:>>with you. Later you might find offers from this
:>>person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
an obsession with the cia is often associated with people who
have some emotional or mental disorder. for some reason, that
particular agency, as opposed to all the other sources of security
has some kind of social stigma. they really are no better or worse
than many.
spreading paranoia about the cia doesn't help anybody get to the
truth about anything, and just labels you a nutcase. don't worry
about them, they probably don't worry about you.
if you continue to see their shadow everywhere, please consider
getting some help.
:>>
:>>Be careful! They like nothing better than to
:>>entrap people by getting you to ask for some
:>>classified information so they can then bust
:>>you.
what moron would get themselves involved with classified information
unless it was part of their job. anybody who works with it
is not about to be stupid enough to talk about it over the net.
i will guess that you believe classified info is held about
your ufo's that you feel should be public. try the freedom of
information act or some legal means. you would be surprised what
you CAN get. if the government is really hiding little green
men somewhere, i wish you luck in finding them, but remember,
such things are often the escape for lunitics, don't be one.
Yong-Koo Bae
all we need is a truth, and honesty will serve the newsgroups better. When we believe in something and go
foward, something will be revealed eventually. Maybe it won't happen in our lifetime, or maybe we will see
what we don't expect to see. However, the most important thing is we believe in something. If we respect each
other, what else can there be matter? After all, not one person can have exactly same life experience as
others.
Dr. Richard Frager
>Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
That is a Negative, Twitch. I have stated one hundred times or more that
I have worked for the N.S.A. Not the one [Deleted] works for, but this
NSA:
The Nordic Security Agency
At various times I have made my services available to the RIA not the
CIA. Of course I am referring to the Reptoid Intelligence Agency.
Sometimes I get to be a MIB or a MIBC (Man-in-black-car) - it's all
very spooky and mysterious. The rest you will have to read in the
books, because it is ABOVE TOP SECRET!
Dr. R.X.F.
Steve Anderson
>on the newsgroups.
What's a "shill"?
____ _____ ____ __ __ ____
/ ___)(_ _)| ___)\ \ / | ___)
\___ \ | | | _)_ \ / | _)_
(____/ |_| |____) \/ |____)
John Robert Riddell
cluste...@yale.edu (Cluster User) wrote:
>In article <3168A2...@whidbey.net>, m...@whidbey.net says...
>
>>
>>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>> on usenet.
What's a Shill?
Just wondering. There was a Miami Vice program (many years ago) where Phil
Collins of Genesis fame ( The Band, not the Book) played a loveable petty
crook called "Phil the Shill." I heard an interview later when they asked him
"What's a Shill?" He answered that He didn't know, that it was made up, but
that it rhymed with Phil and they thought Americans would think it sounded
like some English Cockney rhyming slang for a petty crook type. (Not and
exact quote.)
Does anyone know what Shill really means?
John.
Dev Nul
Phil's a shill who plays swill.
Praise the O.E.D.: N. American slang
A decoy or accomplice, esp. one posing as an enthusiastic or
successful customer to encourage other buyers, gamblers, etc.
1916:
One who leads the others by patronizing a show or game.
1935:
She had often thought of renting him out as a shill for some
tent show evangelist.
1971:
The commonest trap was for a shill to haunt Ninth Avenue
disguised as a farm hand.
1978:
As a shill she played with casino money... She was subject
not to fate but to the fixed weekly salary she received
from the casino.
David J. Helland
>
> In message <31696d22...@nntp.ix.netcom.com> - blkl...@ix.netcom.com (Bla
> cklight HeadQuarters) writes:
> :>
> :>On 7 Apr 1996 06:23:27 GMT, "Dr. Richard X. Frager"
still won't be quiet.
John and Susan Hutchins
>In article <4kdogu$e...@news.ycc.yale.edu>,
> cluste...@yale.edu (Cluster User) wrote:
>>In article <3168A2...@whidbey.net>, m...@whidbey.net says...
>>
>>>Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>>> on usenet.
>What's a Shill?
>Just wondering. There was a Miami Vice program (many years ago) where Phil
>Collins of Genesis fame ( The Band, not the Book) played a loveable petty
>crook called "Phil the Shill." I heard an interview later when they asked him
>"What's a Shill?" He answered that He didn't know, that it was made up, but
>that it rhymed with Phil and they thought Americans would think it sounded
>like some English Cockney rhyming slang for a petty crook type. (Not and
>exact quote.)
>Does anyone know what Shill really means?
>John.
Shill, in old time carnival parlance, is a person who actually works
for the show by posing as a regular customer. His job was to encourage
the paying customers to buy tickets, snake oil, whatever was being
sold. My strong hunch is Frager's post was the snake-oil this time.
John Hutchins
Hawker
"Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>on usenet...
>
Snip
>
>Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents...
Paranoia becomes you.
When are you going to go the next step and claim the CIA shills are in fact
ET's in disguise. The reason's not clear but no doubt you'll find one.
ron h
The Evil Anti-Fabio
>Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>>
>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>
>I think the CIA has more important things to do than "hang out" on usenet
>looking to entrap ufo buffs by getting them to ask for classified info.
>
>Mark
Then you're unspeakably naive. Read this.
--------------
Subject: GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RUN ANONYMOUS REMAILERS (fwd)
-----forwarded-----
I attended last weeks "Information, National Policies, and International
Infrastructure" Symposium at Harvard Law School, organized by the Global
Information Infrastructure Commission, the Kennedy School and the
Institute for Information Technology Law & Policy of Harvard Law School.
During the presentation by Paul Strassmann, National Defense University
and William Marlow, Science Applications International Corporation,
entitled "Anonymous Remailers as Risk-Free International Infoterrorists"
the questions was raised from audience (Professor Chaarles Nesson,
Harvard Law School) - in a rather extended debate - whether the CIA and
similar government agencies are involved in running anonymous remailers
as this would be a perfect target to scan possibly illegal messages.
Both presenters explicitly acknowledged that a number of anonymous
remnailers in the US are run by government agencies scanning traffic.
Marlow said that the government runs at least a dozen remailers and that
the most popular remailers in France and Germany are run by the
respective government agencies in these countries. In addition they
mentioned that the NSA has successfully developed systems to break
encrypted messages below 1000 bit of key length and strongly suggested
to use at least 1024 bit keys. They said that they semselves use 1024
bit keys.
I ask Marlos afterwards if these comments were off or on record, he
paused then said that he can be quoted.
So I thought I pass that on. It seems interesting enough, don't you
think?
Best
Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger
Information Law Project
Austrian Institute for Legal Policy
Grou...@alpha.c2.org
===========================================================
The Evil Anti-Fabio
The Evil Anti-Fabio <hug...@gonzo.Colorado.EDU> wrote:
>In article <3168A2...@whidbey.net>, Mark <m...@whidbey.net> wrote:
>>Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>>>
>>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>> on usenet.
>>
>>I think the CIA has more important things to do than "hang out" on usenet
>>looking to entrap ufo buffs by getting them to ask for classified info.
>>
>>Mark
>-------------
>
>Then you're unspeakably naive. Read this.
>
>--------------
>Subject: GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RUN ANONYMOUS REMAILERS (fwd)
>
>-----forwarded-----
...And then read this. And then tell tell us again that the CIA is
not interested in what goes on in our newsgroups!
The following was pulled off of Lexis-Nexis.
--------
PR Newswire, September 27, 1995
HEADLINE: WEB REVIEW EX-SPOOKS TAKE OVER INTERNET DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION
BODY:
The following was released today by Web Review:
The press recently reported that the National Science Foundation has turned
over Internet Domain Name registration to Network Solutions, Inc. (NSI) of
Herndon, VA. (An "Internet domain" is the basic address of a corporation or
organization, such as gnn.com.) The press failed to note some interesting
connections.
SEBASTOPOL, Calif, Sept. 27
Web Review, a biweekly online magazine on the World Wide Web (see Special
Report at http://gnn.com/wr/), revealed today that NSI was purchased in May by
Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of San Diego.
SAIC is a $2 billion company indicted by the Justice Department on ten felony
counts for fraud in managing a Superfund toxic cleanup site (SAIC pleaded
guilty).
SAIC has also been sued by the Justice Department for civil fraud on an F-15
fighter contract.
PR Newswire, September 27, 1995
SAIC's board members include Admiral Bobby Inman, former NSA head and deputy
director of the CIA; Melvin Laird, Nixon's defense secretary; and retired
General Max Thurman, commander of the Panama Invasion. Recently departed board
members include Robert Gates, former CIA director; William Perry, current
Secretary of Defense; and John Deutch, the current CIA director. Current
SAIC government contracts include re-engineering information systems at the
Pentagon, automation of the FBI's computerized fingerprint identification
system, and building a national criminal history information system.
"At the very time the Internet community is struggling with the issues of
encryption and privacy, I'm more than a little uneasy to find this bunch of
ex-spooks sitting at the very entry point of the Net," says Jim Warren, a
leading activist in making government records accessible, in the article
written by investigative journalist Stephen Pizzo. Pizzo is Web Review Senior
Editor and co-author of the book "Inside Job," an expose on the savings & loan
looting.
Web Review is produced by Songline Studios, an affiliate of O'Reilly &
Associates. CONTACT: Dale Dougherty, president of Songline
Studios, 707-829-6500, da...@ora.com; or Richard Coman, Managing Editor of
Web Review, 707-829-5600, rco...@ora.com
PR Newswire, September 27, 1995
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: September 28, 1995
---------------------------------7105655330077--
The Evil Anti-Fabio
>>In article <3168A2...@whidbey.net>, Mark <m...@whidbey.net> wrote:
>>>Dr. Richard X. Frager wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>>> on usenet.
>>>
>>>I think the CIA has more important things to do than "hang out" on usenet
>>>looking to entrap ufo buffs by getting them to ask for classified info.
>>>
>>>Mark
>>-------------
>>
>>Then you're unspeakably naive. Read this.
>>
>>--------------
>>Subject: GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RUN ANONYMOUS REMAILERS (fwd)
>>
>not interested in what goes on in our newsgroups!
>
>
>HEADLINE: WEB REVIEW EX-SPOOKS TAKE OVER INTERNET DOMAIN NAME REGISTRATION
...And then pay a visit to: http://www.fas.org/pub/gen/fas/cp/swett.html
Where you will find the entire document which contains the following
excerpt:
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT:
THE INTERNET
Prepared by
Mr. Charles Swett
Assistant for Strategic Assessment
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and
Low-Intensity Conflict
(Policy Planning)
Room 2B525, the Pentagon 703-693-5208 17 July 1995
[HUGE snip here, but a MUST READ! Emphasis in the following text as all
caps is mine.]
....
Intelligence
The Internet is a potentially lucrative source of intelligence useful to DoD.
This intelligence can include:
Reports on current events
Analytic assessments by politically astute observers on or near the
scene of those events, many of whom offer unique insights
Information about the plans and operations of politically active groups.
John Anderson's concept for using the Internet to provide early warning
of impending security threats has a great deal of merit. Internet message
traffic about developing situations tends to precede news and intelligence
reporting, since the individuals who originate that traffic are not
constrained by the resource limitations to which news and intelligence
organizations are subject. Those organizations must prioritize their efforts,
focusing on what appears to be the most important items of the moment.
Individual observers overseas who have access to the Internet can write about
anything that interests them. IT IS LIKELY THAT ROUTINE MONITORING OF MESSAGES
ORIGINATING IN OTHER COUNTRIES WOULD HELP PROVIDE STRATEGIC WARNING OF
DEVELOPING SECURITY THREATS THAT WOULD BE OF CONCERN TO THE UNITED STATES.
At the same time, it should be noted that a great deal of the message
traffic on the Internet is idle chit-chat with no intelligence value
whatsoever, a veritable "Tower of Babble." MONITORING OF THAT TRAFFIC
WOULD NEED TO BE SUPPORTED BY AUTOMATED FILTERS THAT PASS THROUGH
FOR HUMAN ANALYSIS ONLY THOSE MESSAGES THAT SATISFY CERTAIN RELEVANCE
CRITERIA. It is also important to note that the accuracy of much of the
information on the Internet would be suspect: "Information and disinformation
about breaking events are pretty raw on the Net. That's the point. You don't
know what to think of any particular bit of information, how to gauge its
credibility... You never really know how to gauge the credibility of the
nightly news or the morning paper, either..."[Rheingold]
Thus new means of validating information received in this way would be
needed. Alteratively, news reports on the Internet could be used to cue
higher confidence means of U.S. intelligence collection, by alerting us to
potentially important factors and all owing us to orient and focus our
collection more precisely.
Beside being used to develop early warning of developing conflicts or the
beginnings of new global trends or "sea changes," the Internet can be used
at the opposite end of the spectrum: TO OBTAIN PINPOINT INFORMATION ABOUT
SPECIFIC MATTERS OF INTEREST. NETWORKS OF HUMAN SOURCES WITH ACCESS TO THE
INTERNET COULD BE DEVELOPED IN AREAS OF SECURITY CONCERN TO THE U.S., AND
THESE SOURCES COULD BE ORIENTED TO SEEK SPECIFIC NEEDED INFORMATION. If
constructed and managed correctly, such a system could be much more
responsive and efficient than the current complex, unwieldy intelligence
tasking and collection processes we must use. WE MIGHT EVEN CONSIDER
CULTIVATING THE CAPABILITY TO PERFORM STRATEGIC RECONNAISSANCE "BY MODEM."
This approach could never replace of ficial DoD intelligence collection
systems or services, but could be a useful adjunct.
THE INTERNET CAN ALSO SERVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES. For example, a
message posted recently in an internet discussion group for left-wing political
activists repeated for their benefit an associated press article about an
upcoming U.S. Army Special Operations Command training exercise directed at
the (empty) St. Moritz Hotel in Miami Beach (see Appendix C).
IF IT BECAME WIDELY KNOWN THAT DoD WERE MONITORING INTERNET TRAFFIC FOR
INTELLIGENCE OR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES, INDIVIDUALS WITH PERSONAL
AGENDAS OR POLITICAL PURPOSES IN MIND, OR WHO ENJOY PLAYING PRANKS, WOULD
DELIBERATELY ENTER FALSE OR MISLEADING MESSAGES. OUR ANALYSIS FUNCTION
WOULD NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS.
[much more follows!] http://www.fas.org/pub/gen/fas/cp/swett.html
fas is The Federation of American Scientists.
--------------------------------
Brian Zeiler
> THE INTERNET CAN ALSO SERVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES.
i.e. Dean Adams.
> IF IT BECAME WIDELY KNOWN THAT DoD WERE MONITORING INTERNET TRAFFIC FOR
> INTELLIGENCE OR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES, INDIVIDUALS WITH PERSONAL
> AGENDAS OR POLITICAL PURPOSES IN MIND, OR WHO ENJOY PLAYING PRANKS, WOULD
> DELIBERATELY ENTER FALSE OR MISLEADING MESSAGES. OUR ANALYSIS FUNCTION
> WOULD NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS.
Well, obviously somebody is an idiot for letting this report slip out. I
say we disinform the hell out of *them*, starting now. Big raid of
100,000 people planned at Wright Patterson on Friday, April 12. Be
there!
--
Brian Zeiler
Equinox
pictures of my the TP stuck to my hairy rear. They then do extensive
computer enhancement to discover wether or not I am now or have ever
been a member of alt.sex.bestiality or alt.sex.vacuum.cleaner.
Of course the CIA is on the Internet! The Internet was started by
the Government! What did you expect? Thats their job! Now tell me
dah-ling, ver iz zee jpeg hidden? And vat is zee pgp key? ;)
Equinox
Rev. Gypsy Joker At The People's Republic of Frobnia
: >opinions you may find yourself getting little
: >"friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
: >with you. Later you might find offers from this
: >person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
: >Be careful! They like nothing better than to
: >entrap people by getting you to ask for some
: >classified information so they can then bust
: >you.
: Oh, yeah, think of all those who have posted classified info to the net!
: There goes our best tactic, Dean!
Does anybody here want some classified documents? eh? EH!? Well you can't
have them! NEENER! NEENER! NEENER!
:
: >Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents,
: >and they have been exposed by some excellent investigative work by
: >certain members of this newsgroup.
:
: Yup, we've been showed up good. Well, I hope they don't cut this great
: pay I've been getting.
You too!? Over on alt.conspiracy Mr. Max Kennedy ummm "unmasked" me as a
UN UberSeKrIt Agent. He knew I was working for them because <gasp> I
disagreed with him! Let that be a lesson to you Mr. nick, never disagree
with anybody, *EVER*!
:
: >My deepest respect goes out to these brave individuals who have flushed
: >out the "spooks" and humanity owes each and every one of you a hearty
: >thank-you! ^^^^^^^^
:
: Yeah, we government "shills" are ANTI-HUMANITY!
Yeah, yeah, yeah...hubba hubba anti-hoomanity hubba hubba, me too and
please add me to the list and all that.
President-for-Life Rev. Gypsy Joker KSC, IM, SP4, Earl of Fives
Critic, Neocheater and Let's do lunch!
Paid fool for J.R. "Bob" Dobbs and Leader Kibo, Thank you very Much!
Czar of alt.gif-agreement
Fuck the CDA!, Sen. Exon is a Pig Fucker!
: --
Earl Curley
>The Evil Anti-Fabio wrote:
>
>> THE INTERNET CAN ALSO SERVE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES.
>
>
>> IF IT BECAME WIDELY KNOWN THAT DoD WERE MONITORING INTERNET TRAFFIC FOR
>> INTELLIGENCE OR COUNTERINTELLIGENCE PURPOSES, INDIVIDUALS WITH PERSONAL
>> AGENDAS OR POLITICAL PURPOSES IN MIND, OR WHO ENJOY PLAYING PRANKS, WOULD
>> DELIBERATELY ENTER FALSE OR MISLEADING MESSAGES. OUR ANALYSIS FUNCTION
>> WOULD NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS.
>
>say we disinform the hell out of *them*, starting now. Big raid of
>100,000 people planned at Wright Patterson on Friday, April 12. Be
>there!
>
>--
>Brian Zeiler
Brian, you're already on the list.
Earl Gordon Curley
psy...@asgo.net
http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/
http://www.webdesign.ca/~psychic/
Dr. Richard X. Frager
others into participating, such as an intelligence operative pretending
to be friendly to garner information.
student14
>In <4kgta3$g...@midland.co.nz> co...@midland.co.nz (John Robert Riddell) writes:
>
>> cluste...@yale.edu (Cluster User) wrote:
>>>In article <3168A2...@whidbey.net>, m...@whidbey.net says...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>>>> on usenet.
>>
>>
>>Just wondering. There was a Miami Vice program (many years ago) where Phil
>>Collins of Genesis fame ( The Band, not the Book) played a loveable petty
>>crook called "Phil the Shill." I heard an interview later when they asked him
>>"What's a Shill?" He answered that He didn't know, that it was made up, but
>>that it rhymed with Phil and they thought Americans would think it sounded
>>like some English Cockney rhyming slang for a petty crook type. (Not and
>>exact quote.)
>>
>>Does anyone know what Shill really means?
>
>
>Praise the O.E.D.: N. American slang
>
>A decoy or accomplice, esp. one posing as an enthusiastic or
>successful customer to encourage other buyers, gamblers, etc.
>
>1916:
>One who leads the others by patronizing a show or game.
>1935:
>She had often thought of renting him out as a shill for some
>tent show evangelist.
>1971:
>The commonest trap was for a shill to haunt Ninth Avenue
>disguised as a farm hand.
>1978:
>As a shill she played with casino money... She was subject
>not to fate but to the fixed weekly salary she received
>from the casino.
yes, you are correct.
student14
yes, that's right.
Dr. Richard X. Frager
Powerful national security insiders have established effective control
over the entrance gateways to Internet. Disturbing signs are now
emerging that the "information superhighway" has been targeted for
systematic surveillance and political dossier-building on Americans'
opinions. This ominous news came in the first of a series of articles by
investigative journalist Steven Pizzo in Web Review, an on-line magazine
of cyberculture and politics (http://gnn.com/wr/). Pizzo is the author
of Inside Job, a groundbreaking expose on the massive fraud and theft of
insured deposits in the 1980s savings and loan debacle (loss to the
American taxpayers: $1 trillion). According to Pizzo, control of
Internet "domain name registration " has passed into private hands -
with the potential for serious mischief or worse.
"Domain names" are the odd looking identifying names that are
assigned to individual computer systems that compose the Internet.
Through a complex chain of licensing arrangements and corporate
acquisitions detailed in Pizzo's article, this crucial control over
Internet domain names has passed from the non-profit National Science
Foundation to Network Solutions, Inc; (NSI). NSI was purchased by
Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of San Diego.
SAIC is a $2 billion defense and FBI contractor with a board of
directors that reads like a Who's Who of the intelligence community.
Board members include Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, former director of the
National Security Agency (NSA), and deputy director of the CIA; and
Melvin Laird, defense secretary under Tricky Dick Nixon; Donald Hicks,
former head of research and development for the Pentagon; Donald Kerr,
former head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory; and General Maxwell
Thurman, the retired commander of the U.S. invasion of Panama. Former
members of SAIC's board include Robert Gates, the former CIA director
under George Bush, current CIA director John Deutch, Anita Jones,
Deutch's former Pentagon procurement officer, and William Perry, the
present secretary of defense.
Control of Internet domain name registration means the ability to
remove troublesome or outspoken computer systems from the network. This
control also confers the power to insinuate phantom domains into the
network, for surveillance purposes, for example, or real-time, automatic
censorship. Anecdotal evidence gathered by Clark Matthews of the
Spotlight, suggest that actual "truth control" is taking place on the
'net now. E-mail messages with controversial contents - including the
details of the SAIC takeover of domain names - have consistently
disappeared as they travel across the network. News items concerning the
compromised Inslaw software (which has many UFO/ET connections) are
being quickly and automatically canceled. And the cancellations are not
by their authors. With domain names under the control of the secret
government insiders, it is possible that large parts of the Internet
could be shut down and silenced at critical times. Exercises in "turning
the Internet off" have already taken place in Taiwan and Hong Kong. In
Taiwan, the 'net was successfully shut down. All network traffic -
including news, opinions and e-mail sent by computer users - was
successfully "bottled up" on the island and prevented from reaching the
world. In Hong Kong, the Internet wasn't quite strangled, but the
British authorities who control that colony managed to throttle free
electronic speech with the rest of the world until everything was
bottlenecked into a few little known satellite links.
THESE ARE ALARMING PRECEDENTS AND SURE SIGNS THAT POWERFUL, SHADOWY
FORCES ARE PREPARING TO CHOP AT THE VERY ROOTS OF AMERICA'S NEW
COMMUNICATION TOOLS. THE SECRETIVE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
SAIC ARE INTELLIGENCE PROFESSIONALS SKILLED AT MANUFACTURING EVENTS -
AND THEN MANUFACTURING PUBLIC OPINION AND CONSENT BY CONTROLLING THE
TRUTH.
Ted Rosen
>>shills
>>on the newsgroups.
>What's a "shill"?
shill \'shil\ n (probably short for _shillaber_, of unknown origin) :
one who acts as a decoy (as for a pitchman or gambler).
-Webster's 7th.
I've already packed my bags. The *Man* is everywhere, and time is
running out . . .
Why can't somebody *do* something? End this monstrous attack by
shadowy G-men upon hapless, crystal-totin' Believers?! Hmmmm?
It's a real disgrace . . .
- TR
Andrea Chen
>What's a "shill"?
A shill is somebody who works as a decoy to encourage people into
certain behaviors. In this context it would be someone who
claimed to believe in alien visitations, argued loudly for
it in newsgroups and attracted mail from those with stories
the govt would like to know and/or suppress. A number of
possible suspects come to mind.
-ac-
Andrea Chen
>In article <4k7n0v$p...@nadine.teleport.com>,
>"Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>on usenet...
>>
>Snip
>>
>>Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents...
This is a pretty standard ploy. Accuse others of what you are guilty
of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
-ac-
Andrea Chen
>You too!? Over on alt.conspiracy Mr. Max Kennedy ummm "unmasked" me as a
>UN UberSeKrIt Agent. He knew I was working for them because <gasp> I
>disagreed with him! Let that be a lesson to you Mr. nick, never disagree
>with anybody, *EVER*!
Yeah! Will I unmasked you because you agreed with me. Not that I'm
a disinfo psyop any more. I got out of it after the Zeiler list
reached 3 dozen. No glory it in any more. So I admitted everything
and then the clever conspiracy unmaskers knew that I wasn't
a spook.
If you deny it that proves it. If you admit it, then that proves you're
not.
Cool huh?
-ac-
p.s. Of course after a while some of them figure out that you're
admitting it to deny it which means that you're ...
Earle D. Jones
(Louis Nick III) wrote:
> Dr. Richard X. Frager <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
> >The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
> >on usenet. If they see that you post dissenting
> >opinions you may find yourself getting little
> >"friendly" notes seeking to establish a relationship
> >with you. Later you might find offers from this
> >person of "insider info" or some other such thing.
> >
> >Be careful! They like nothing better than to
> >entrap people by getting you to ask for some
> >classified information so they can then bust
> >you.
>
=================
If the US Constitution is still valid, asking for classified information
is not against the law.
Giving out classified information to those unauthorized to have it is
against the law.
earle
=====
--
..no sig is good sig..
David J. Crook
>
> >shills
> >on the newsgroups.
>
>
> / ___)(_ _)| ___)\ \ / | ___)
> \___ \ | | | _)_ \ / | _)_
Steve,
I'm not sure what shills are but Shally shells shea shills by the shea
shore.
Regards,
Dave
"Duck 'em if they can't take a joke!!"
George Washington, 1776
Chris H Kostanick
>If you deny it that proves it. If you admit it, then that proves you're
>not.
I still get paid to debunk UFO stuff.
There are no men in black.
Chris Kostanick
Paid Disinfo Agent - Your Opinions Are My Opinions, If You Are Paying Cash
Brian Zeiler
> I still get paid to debunk UFO stuff.
By who? Maybe Louis Nick III would pay you, since his name implies a
gene pool devoid of creativity...
> There are no men in black.
Yes, we know.
> Chris Kostanick
> Paid Disinfo Agent
No, you don't have the finesse.
--
Brian Zeiler
Lawrence E. McKnight
>
>>In article <4k7n0v$p...@nadine.teleport.com>,
>>"Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
>>>The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
>>>on usenet...
>>>
>>Snip
>>>
>>>Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community agents...
>
>This is a pretty standard ploy. Accuse others of what you are guilty
>of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
>appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
Hmm. Why should that require any effort?
>
> -ac-
>
>
>
>
---------------
Larry McKnight
(this space unintentionally left blank.....
Daniel G. Walimaa
(Lawrence E. McKnight) writes:
>>This is a pretty standard ploy. Accuse others of what you are guilty
>>of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
>>appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
>
>Hmm. Why should that require any effort?
Because the efforts taken so far by the extreme skeptic community
haven't washed so far. That's why.
Dan W.
L.R. Waldman
>>>>
>>>>Some UFO debunkers have been shown to be intelligence-community
agents...
>>
>>This is a pretty standard ploy. Accuse others of what you are guilty
>>of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
>>appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
>
>An easy answer to the probelm of UFO lack of evidence. Everyone is
out to disprove the believers. There's a conspiracy to cover it up. A
great response by idiots who can't give tangible support to their
beliefs.
Dr. Richard X. Frager
>>This is a pretty standard ploy. Accuse others of what you are guilty
>>of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
>>appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
Dean, Larry exposed our little "charade!" I hope the "Brass" back at
the National (In)Security Agency doesn't pull in the reigns on the
beautifully conceived "Operation Netscape!" Especially when we had the
honest UFO researchers in the palm of our hand!!
Just when we had the UFO "buffs" believing the swamp gas theory to
explain away over 100,000 sightings world-wide, on a yearly basis!! And
the UFO "enthusiasts" really fell for the old Doug and Dave scheme,
pretending that those 2 "kooks" could make thousand upon thousands of
crop-circles and pictographs world-wide for many decade.
Also, those UFO "fanatics" really bought the Satanic Cult Equation to
explain away tens of thousands of animal mutilations, again world-wide,
for over 3 decades.
Yep, Larry really exposed us for the world to see. I hope Mr. Sagan
will make room for this really important new debunker!!
I guess I'll have to come clean since good ol' Larry explained all the
sightings, crop-circles, animal mutilations, abductions, trace cases,
government cover-up, Area-51 etc. etc. etc. Yep, Larry really shot a
hole through all that. I hope you won't call him "paranoid and
delusional" Dean.
Brian Zeiler
> An easy answer to the probelm of UFO lack of evidence. Everyone is
> out to disprove the believers. There's a conspiracy to cover it up. A
> great response by idiots who can't give tangible support to their
> beliefs.
Typical skeptic rubbish. Every day a new skeptic cruises in here,
totally unfamiliar with evidence for UFOs, and convinces himself that UFO
"believers" simply FEEL like believing in UFOs with no evidence and thus
accuse the government of conspiring to hide all the evidence.
This is, of course, pure crap, and it's idiots like this one who both
undermine and, ironically, represent UFO skepticism. People like this
are totally unaware that most of the best evidence for UFOs was
declassified BY THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF. It's people like this that don't
even know that the USAF's Project Bluebook never saw cases that
"threatened national security" since they were routed to some unspecified
office in the Pentagon, or that the CIA had "CIA UFO experts" in 1976 (23
years after they were 'done'), or that the USAF's very own commissioned
Condon Committee through the University of Colorado concluded that the
Trent photos were likely legitimate and that the Lakenheath radar-visual
case was likely "a mechanical device of unknown origin" under intelligent
control with propulsion that was inconsistent with terrestrial craft.
But, these are the same people that are going to open their wrists when
the full set of admittedly withheld information is finally declassified,
so perhaps the bright side is that the human gene pool stands to improve
dramatically with the release of such information.
--
Brian Zeiler
realityman
<bdze...@students.wisc.edu> wrote:
You think Star Trek is for real. Get a life or a real job
MJ-SETI
: Typical skeptic rubbish. Every day a new skeptic cruises in here,
: totally unfamiliar with evidence for UFOs, and convinces himself that UFO
: "believers" simply FEEL like believing in UFOs with no evidence and thus
: accuse the government of conspiring to hide all the evidence.
I see this day after day as well. The overall desire of the average
pseudo-skeptic is to ignore/avoid the evidence that way they can say it
doesn't exist. Of course, even getting them to admit that there is
evidence is tough enough in and of itself. I've taken to calling it
*data* which seems to be about as much as their 500 cc brains can handle.
I even had a fanatic write to me telling me I didn't know about Trementon,
Utah because I mis-spelled "Tremonton.!" He then went on to say that he
had lived there, seen seagulls and that he was "certain" that this was
what the film showed. I never did hear back from him after I gave him the
facts.
--
MJ-SETI
Brian Zeiler
> He then went on to say that he
> had lived there, seen seagulls and that he was "certain" that this was
> what the film showed.
This is a branch of skeptopathology know as "skeptic narcissism".
According to DSM-IV, the skeptopath will presume his armchair analysis
sufficient to counter the in-depth analysis of motion picture evidence by
the USAF and Navy scientists, ignoring evidence contrary to the seagull
hypothesis as well as the obvious question as to why seagull UFOs aren't
filmed all over the world everyday instead of once in 1950. The
skeptopath will also not wonder why no seagull has sufficient albedo to
cause the apparent self-luminescence exhibited in the film. Interesting
creature, the skeptopath; fortunately, extinction seems to be imminent.
--
Brian Zeiler
Mark
buffs on the internet. The document supports what is already widely
known, the CIA and other INTEL communities (including those of other
nations) do monitor the "net" for information.
Mark
klaatu
>
> In article <4k7n0v$p...@nadine.teleport.com>,
> "Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> >The Central Intelligence Agency has shills
> >on usenet...
> >
> Snip
> >
>
>
> When are you going to go the next step and claim the CIA shills are in fact
> ET's in disguise. The reason's not clear but no doubt you'll find one.
Oh dammit now he's on to us. Quickly, we must return to the mothership.
Abandon all of the underground bases!
>
> ron h
--
Be kind to your neighbors, | "When the going gets wierd the weird turn pro."
even though they be | http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/home.html
transgenic chimerae. | Now. Chock full of uninteresting links.
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Sarah Connor?"
Rev. Gypsy Joker At The People's Republic of Frobnia
: cdem...@gate.net (Rev. Gypsy Joker At The People's Republic of Frobnia) writes:
:
:
: >You too!? Over on alt.conspiracy Mr. Max Kennedy ummm "unmasked" me as a
: >UN UberSeKrIt Agent. He knew I was working for them because <gasp> I
: >disagreed with him! Let that be a lesson to you Mr. nick, never disagree
: >with anybody, *EVER*!
:
:
: Yeah! Will I unmasked you because you agreed with me. Not that I'm
: a disinfo psyop any more. I got out of it after the Zeiler list
: reached 3 dozen. No glory it in any more. So I admitted everything
: and then the clever conspiracy unmaskers knew that I wasn't
: a spook.
It must be that ultra advanced militia technology that helps them sniff
us out, it just ain't fair!
:
: If you deny it that proves it. If you admit it, then that proves you're
: not.
:
: Cool huh?
Wait a second if you say you're not you are, but if you say you're not
<tick, tick, tick>
:
: -ac-
:
: p.s. Of course after a while some of them figure out that you're
: admitting it to deny it which means that you're ...
:
:
AIIIEEGH! <Gypsy Joker's head explodes just like in that Nifty Scanners
movie>
President-for-Life Rev. Gypsy Joker KSC, IM, SP4, Earl of Fives
Critic, Neocheater and Rest In Pieces President Joker, 1974-1996
Paid fool for J.R. "Bob" Dobbs and Leader Kibo, Thank you very Much!
Czar of alt.gif-agreement
Fuck the CDA!, Sen. Exon is a Pig Fucker!
UN Uber SeKrIt Agent Number #000
David Christian
food not bombs doesn't take a position on ufo's.
THANKS!
Phil Boyd Studge
> L.R. Waldman wrote:
>
> > An easy answer to the probelm of UFO lack of evidence. Everyone is
> > out to disprove the believers. There's a conspiracy to cover it up. A
> > great response by idiots who can't give tangible support to their
> > beliefs.
>
> Typical skeptic rubbish. Every day a new skeptic cruises in here,
> totally unfamiliar with evidence for UFOs, and convinces himself that UFO
> "believers" simply FEEL like believing in UFOs with no evidence and thus
> accuse the government of conspiring to hide all the evidence.
Everyday a newbie cruises in here and typically asks about junk that was
exposed years ago as a hoax...or offers their theory that sounds like
whacky stuff, or has elements put forth by countless other folks who have
tracked
this enigma for years. People are cynical today. Don't take it with so
much bitterness, just accept that the area you have choosen to obsess with is
a pretty scary one if any of your pet theories or Mr. Vallees are correct.
> This is, of course, pure crap, and it's idiots like this one who both
> undermine and, ironically, represent UFO skepticism. People like this
> are totally unaware that most of the best evidence for UFOs was
> declassified BY THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF.
Actually I've read blue book, blue book unknowns, and countless other things
that some folks claim are government documents and I return to the fact that
this area is fraught with FRAUD, HOAXES, DISINFORMATION, Self delusion,and a
few occurences that are truly really weird.
>It's people like this that don't
> even know that the USAF's Project Bluebook never saw cases that
> "threatened national security" since they were routed to some unspecified
> office in the Pentagon,
And obviously for good reason don't you think? National Security issues
demand compartmentilization. Especially if your *aliens* turn out to be a
spoofing or recon device from an adversary trying to find out your
capabilities and reaction times. As the EVIL Phil Klass pointed out...If
*they* are here and doing what people say they are doing then IT IS a
national security issue that I personally don't want to see screwed up.
And if its something to cover government wankings ala Fast Walker then I
hope they screw up and the good guys win (I don't care for that scrotal
clamping or cattle prod stuff by those guys in REVO's and white grease
paint...ya, I know I'm kind of old fashion and some people like Mapelthorp
would have paid good money for it but...thats me.)
> or that the CIA had "CIA UFO experts" in 1976 (23
> years after they were 'done'), or that the USAF's very own commissioned
> Condon Committee through the University of Colorado concluded that the
> Trent photos were likely legitimate and that the Lakenheath radar-visual
> case was likely "a mechanical device of unknown origin" under intelligent
> control with propulsion that was inconsistent with terrestrial craft.
OR REALLY GOOD DISINFORMATION MEANT TO COVER BORING SECRETS...like that
Area 51 Quanta-Lazar-Improbability drive. I can't wait to get mine!
>
> But, these are the same people that are going to open their wrists when
> the full set of admittedly withheld information is finally declassified,
> so perhaps the bright side is that the human gene pool stands to improve
> dramatically with the release of such information.
If thats what you really think I'm glad they kept if from you as long as
they have because I'm wondering what kind of an implant you have in your
left ear.
It apparently is working and your scaring me man!
> --
> Brian Zeiler
As always Warmest Regards, and good luck with that hedge fund. PBStudge
Jim Rogers
...
>.... The
How many white seagulls have you seen, and what albedo would be sufficient?
Numbers, please.
Jim
Marcus Hast
<Snip>
>Just when we had the UFO "buffs" believing the swamp gas theory to
>explain away over 100,000 sightings world-wide, on a yearly basis!! And
The swamp gas theory isn't the only info. you're just trying to
distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus is
another one. Hallucinations, "wishing", stupidicy, misunderstandings.
etc can explain quite a few others. Isn't true that some 90% of the
UFO sitings can be explained? (I've read this figure, somewhere :-)
And just 'cause you see something you can't explain doesn't mean it's
the Greys from Mars invading Earth.
>the UFO "enthusiasts" really fell for the old Doug and Dave scheme,
>pretending that those 2 "kooks" could make thousand upon thousands of
>crop-circles and pictographs world-wide for many decade.
Errr. Like NOBODY ELSE could have done the same thing? Oh no! Only
good 'ol Dough & Dave are capable of making crop circles.
And, again, what make's 'em "Made of Greys"?
>Also, those UFO "fanatics" really bought the Satanic Cult Equation to
>explain away tens of thousands of animal mutilations, again world-wide,
>for over 3 decades.
Oh my. I've NEVER heard of cattle mutilations in Europe. In fact the
first time I really heard anyone talk about it was in the US.
<Snip>
>I guess I'll have to come clean since good ol' Larry explained all the
>sightings, crop-circles, animal mutilations, abductions, trace cases,
>government cover-up, Area-51 etc. etc. etc. Yep, Larry really shot a
>hole through all that. I hope you won't call him "paranoid and
>delusional" Dean.
For once, why not PROVE that there is a coverup hiding ET evidence
first? And Area-51, how do we know what's going on in there when we
can't get in? How do we know that there's aliens in there? How come
most of the abductions are in the US? How come the "original"
abductees, like Adamski, say that the aliens are nice?
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of
people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
- from: The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy
Marcus Hast marcu...@mailbox.swipnet.se
Living long, and prosperous...
Steve McPhail
>The swamp gas theory isn't the only info. you're just trying to
>distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus is
>another one. Hallucinations, "wishing", stupidicy, misunderstandings.
>etc can explain quite a few others. Isn't true that some 90% of the
>UFO sitings can be explained? (I've read this figure, somewhere :-)
What about the other 10%? I find it interesting you list only two
physical explainations, and try to blame the rest on misinterpritation or
"stupidicy"(kinda funny you misspell stupidity, eh?). It's the classic
"All UFO researchers are whackos," kind of thing. It's the kind of
attitude skeptics have tried(and have done quite successfully,
unfortunately), to pass onto the general public- No serious professional
would believe in such "nonsense". Despite the fact many people with
degrees, scientists, serious researchers who look at the issue
objectively, etc. are involved, it's just ignored. It's unfortunate it
took a TV show(X-Files) to make people start and take a second look at
this phenomenon.
>And just 'cause you see something you can't explain doesn't mean it's
>the Greys from Mars invading Earth.
Typical skeptic attitude. When has someone said something like
that? That's IGNORANCE. Have you ever looked at any of the classic cases?
Can you explain to me why a balloon, even a "top secret" one(although one
that wasn't important enough to have any time spent looking for it)
required an armed security guard and needed to be flown to Washington?
Can you explain to me how three people watching "swamp gas" or
"hallucinating" got ACCUTE RADIATION POISONING?
>Errr. Like NOBODY ELSE could have done the same thing? Oh no! Only
>good 'ol Dough & Dave are capable of making crop circles.
>
>And, again, what make's 'em "Made of Greys"?
I'm not really too much a believer of the crop-circle connection
myself, though they were interesting to see the first time around. It
reminds me of von Daaniken, who took pictures of things a foot across and
claimed they were thousands of feet across.
>
>Oh my. I've NEVER heard of cattle mutilations in Europe. In fact the
>first time I really heard anyone talk about it was in the US.
I have. While it's possible UFOs do have something to do with a
very small percent of them(When muscle tissue is so drained of blood it's
white, I'm a little curious), I believe most of them are related to
satanic cults. It's more wide-spread than people think(the US military,
in fact, has been petitioned to include a Satanic priest for Satanic
soldiers...pretty scary).
>
>For once, why not PROVE that there is a coverup hiding ET evidence
>first? And Area-51, how do we know what's going on in there when we
>can't get in? How do we know that there's aliens in there? How come
>most of the abductions are in the US? How come the "original"
>abductees, like Adamski, say that the aliens are nice?
There has been a lot of evidence. If there was solid proof, we
wouldn't be having this debate. Can you prove to me there's NOT a
conspiracy? Area-51 may or may not be involved with UFOs, but there's
certainly SOMETHING going on there. Not a lot of places would burn all
their waste and then have the President exempt it from environmental
protection because of the interests of national security.
Abductions are a very strange thing, also, because it's hard to
tell anymore who is faking it and who isn't. And then, if these people,
who have very real psychological after-effects, come forward, they're
labeled liars and fanatics. I talked to a psychologist on this campus who
has dealt with abductees, and he says while he doesn't know if aliens are
involved at all, these people are suffering the same kind of
psychological effects that a rape victim might feel. Remember THAT the
next time you decide to blast an abductee, skeptics.
Quite simply, there are some very compelling stories in this
field, and those who want to believe them can. In fact, if we were
researching, say, a murder trial, I'd say we would have long since had a
hanging. The evidence is there, just a lot of people don't want to
believe. And until we have solid proof, that's where it'll have to stand.
Andrea Chen
>>
>> But, these are the same people that are going to open their wrists when
>> the full set of admittedly withheld information is finally declassified,
>> so perhaps the bright side is that the human gene pool stands to improve
>> dramatically with the release of such information.
>If thats what you really think I'm glad they kept if from you as long as
>they have because I'm wondering what kind of an implant you have in your
>left ear.
>It apparently is working and your scaring me man!
It appears to be exactly what he thinks. He is also out in favor
of wanting the process of "natural selection" to be applied to
"inner city" (code word?) dwellers. It is a bit fascinating because
both Huffy and Hiney have come out with similar remarks about
blacks. In addition all 3 of our heroes have made enlightening
remarks about the role of women. While the data is far from
sufficient, there seems to be indications that those who
hold to a standard "X-file paradigm" as these 3 and several others
do, have views assoiciated with the wild and wacky right.
Wonder if there is any research money to check this out a little
further.
Beyond the more "realistic" believers we have d4s claims about
the racial beliefs of "the way" a cult that believes in alien
saviors. Two relatively independant believers of this general
type (not way members, but eager for indoctrination by aliens)
are Schwann and Grantland. Both are from South Africa. When
Doctress Neutopia went over there he evidently told her that
Shantytowns are of no interest. Grantland is accusing "equal
opportunity" of causing the death of the west, but seems to
have had no problem with formal apartheid.
As I have stated before, this does not constitute evidence, but
there are interesting patterns which suggest hypothesis worth
testing. It may be that obsession with aliens has significant
correlation with racist and reactionary politics.
There is indeed Zundels claim that flying saucers come from the
secret Nazi civilization at the south pole. There have also been
arguments that some "alien religions" are tied into occult
doctrines that certain Nazis found attractive 70 years ago
and which had other followers through other substreams of
European and American racialism. For some reason, Mr. Dolan
has argued bitterly and irrationally whenever such claims
are made indicating the possibility that they hit a sore
point.
-ac-
-ac-
Jonathan Waisman
> >>of. More than one believer has pointed out that "Doctor" Frager
> >>appears to be dedicated to making UFO believers appear to be nuts.
> >
>
> Because the efforts taken so far by the extreme skeptic community
> haven't washed so far. That's why.
>
> Dan W.
Well does anyone out there have even the slightest bit of evidence?
Anything? So then might not skepticism be justified?
Jonathan Waisman
> out to disprove the believers. There's a conspiracy to cover it up. A
> great response by idiots who can't give tangible support to their
> beliefs.
Now now, there's no evidence yet that they're idiots.
Jonathan Waisman
>
>
> Paid Disinfo Agent - Your Opinions Are My Opinions, If You Are Paying Cash
I agree with you. I'll take cash now..
Jonathan Waisman
> facts.
>
>
> --
> MJ-SETI
Exactly what facts were those?
Jonathan Waisman
Yeah, but what kind of information? UFO stories that remain unprovable,
or is it more likely for terrorism and child molestors?
Jonathan Waisman
> creature, the skeptopath; fortunately, extinction seems to be imminent.
>
> --
> Brian Zeiler
Au contraire, their numbers are on the rise.
Obiwan Canobi
sit around and talk absolute bullshit!!!!
When the govermnt decides to release everything it knows about ufo's it
will, until then you can speculate all you like
qjefhgdfjkg
RaginWolf
>
> "Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> <Snip>
> >Just when we had the UFO "buffs" believing the swamp gas theory to
> >explain away over 100,000 sightings world-wide, on a yearly basis!! And
>
> distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus is
> another one. Hallucinations, "wishing", stupidicy, misunderstandings.
> etc can explain quite a few others. Isn't true that some 90% of the
> UFO sitings can be explained? (I've read this figure, somewhere :-)
>
> the Greys from Mars invading Earth.
>
> >pretending that those 2 "kooks" could make thousand upon thousands of
> >crop-circles and pictographs world-wide for many decade.
>
> good 'ol Dough & Dave are capable of making crop circles.
>
> And, again, what make's 'em "Made of Greys"?
>
> >explain away tens of thousands of animal mutilations, again world-wide,
> >for over 3 decades.
>
> first time I really heard anyone talk about it was in the US.
>
> >I guess I'll have to come clean since good ol' Larry explained all the
> >sightings, crop-circles, animal mutilations, abductions, trace cases,
> >government cover-up, Area-51 etc. etc. etc. Yep, Larry really shot a
> >hole through all that. I hope you won't call him "paranoid and
> >delusional" Dean.
>
> first? And Area-51, how do we know what's going on in there when we
> can't get in? How do we know that there's aliens in there? How come
> most of the abductions are in the US? How come the "original"
> abductees, like Adamski, say that the aliens are nice?
>
> people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
> - from: The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy
>
> Marcus Hast marcu...@mailbox.swipnet.se
> Living long, and prosperous...
Why is it that I ALLWAYS read serious responses to satirical posts?
Come on Marcus. READ closely from now on!
Paul Murphy
>Chris H Kostanick wrote:
>> There are no men in black.
>Yes, we know.
Shows how much you know. I am an adult male and wear black.
Therefore it is all true.
Muff
~~~~~~
As time divides, we watch, we wait...
Paul Murphy: ne...@pipex.dial.com
Cluster User
pbst...@concentric.net says...
>National Security issues
>demand compartmentilization. Especially if your *aliens* turn out to be a
>spoofing or recon device from an adversary trying to find out your
>capabilities and reaction times. As the EVIL Phil Klass pointed out...If
>*they* are here and doing what people say they are doing then IT IS a
>national security issue that I personally don't want to see screwed up.
How do you mean "screwed up"? I take it you mean the whole matter should be
kept secret (the idea that there might be devices from "elsewhere" in our
atmosphere)? I don't understand the basis for that point of view.
The only "national security" I could see our government reacting about would
be its own fear for itself. If we were aware that we had no security
regarding these alledged "aliens", the government would to some degree lose.
When we were battling the soviets, things were rosy for the government, the
threat was just great enough that it kept the taxpayers of both countries
eager to give up their money in the name of their "national security." But
with "aliens" with what appears to be vastly superior technology, what good
is all that military money we're spending? The government probably would see
itself as losing some authority in such a situation.
[...]
>OR REALLY GOOD DISINFORMATION MEANT TO COVER BORING SECRETS...like that
>Area 51 Quanta-Lazar-Improbability drive. I can't wait to get mine!
I tend to think the Area 51 situation has provided a wonderful fodder for
disinformation. One possiblity is that the government LIKES the idea that
everyone is caught up with believing they have UFOs up there; would certainly
seem impressive to our enemies. That's a funny twist.
Leah Wesolowski
:=} It may be that obsession with aliens has significant
:=}correlation with racist and reactionary politics.
:=}
I wonder if you count yourself in the above classification?
You spend enough time here certianly.
****************************************************************
* Please do not attempt to read between the lines I have typed *
* above, as there is nothing written in between them. LW *
****************************************************************
Daniel G. Walimaa
Yeah they're breeding like cockroaches alright! Somebody pass the can
o' bug spray! :>
Dan W.
Coolness Incarnate
1. Learn how domain names work
2. Learn how big the Internet is
3. Learn how much data passes through the Internet
4. Learn what the design problems would be for real time censorship
-----------------------------
Coolness Incarnate
cool...@crh0843.urh.uiuc.edu
http://crh0843.urh.uiuc.edu/~coolness/
Doom Prophet Extraordinaire
Dr. Richard X. Frager
>"Dr. Richard X. Frager" <rfr...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>Just when we had the UFO "buffs" believing the swamp gas theory to
>>explain away over 100,000 sightings world-wide, on a yearly basis!!
>
>The swamp gas theory isn't the only info. you're just trying to
>distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus is
>another one.
MY MISTAKE. You are right, again. Swamp gas does not explain anywhere
from the 100,000 to 1 million sightings of alien crafts, world-wide,
every year! I forgot the Venus and Mars debunking theory! By the way,
how does Venus fly over 10,000 miles per hour, stop on a dime, and then
hover for 20 minutes. And then take off instantaneously at over 1000
m.p.h., and make 90 degree turns. Oh, that must be swamp gas!!
>For once, why not PROVE...(yadda yadda yadda!!)
Sure we can prove it. Meet as at Area-51 tomorrow. Sorry if you can't
get clearance to get in. You UFO "deniers" never seem to be at the
right place at the right time. That's kind of the story of all UFO
debunkers lives, now isn't it!!
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
#marcu...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Marcus Hast) wrote:
#>The swamp gas theory isn't the only info. you're just trying to
#>distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus
is
#>another one. Hallucinations, "wishing", stupidicy,
misunderstandings.
#>etc can explain quite a few others. Isn't true that some 90% of the
#>UFO sitings can be explained? (I've read this figure, somewhere :-)
# What about the other 10%?
They are unidentified. That is what the U in UFO stands for after
all! That doesn't mean that they are greys and/or reptioids,
Pleidians, Zetas, time travelers, from the hollow earth, or anything
else. Just unidentified.
I find it interesting you list only two
#physical explainations, and try to blame the rest on
misinterpritation or
#"stupidicy"
It is interesting that you don't understand the meaning of the etc.!
Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Schwann
-i see you are full of hatred today gertrude (i prefer not to use your group name)
i suppose i should rant and rave etc at having been smeared (yet again)..frankly i'd
hoped you were onto a more peaceful mission - like setting up a newsgroup or
something..but it seems that calling people names is still your favourite game..
or of course you can always apologise for lying....
You have been spreading rumours about Doctress Neutopiua and i since she returned to
the States and have not derived anything other than the morbid satisfaction of
reading your own words...when you need us to believe you we will be unable to hear
your cries for HELP
you get what you give...
live love life
schwann
Dr. Richard X. Frager
>Steve McPhail <mat...@uoknor.edu> wrote:
>>#marcu...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Marcus Hast) wrote:
>
>#>distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus
JEEZ - The debunkers are suffering from their yearly atmospheric
confabulations when the planet Venus and Mars can be seen in the
Northern Hemisphere. UFO debunkers usually come down with the hives and
a terrible rash, (as well as shortness of brain!) This disease is known
as Swamp-Gas-itis.
The best cure is to ignore them and hope that their Messiah "Carl Sagan"
can help his "flock" find the light --- of Jupiter!!
Roger Smith
>'net now. E-mail messages with controversial contents - including the
>details of the SAIC takeover of domain names - have consistently
>disappeared as they travel across the network.
Gee .. looks like they missed one. :-)
-- Roger
* Harry Nilsson Home Page: http://www.magicnet.net/~rasmith/nilsson.html
Steve McPhail
># What about the other 10%?
>They are unidentified. That is what the U in UFO stands for after
>all! That doesn't mean that they are greys and/or reptioids,
>Pleidians, Zetas, time travelers, from the hollow earth, or anything
>else. Just unidentified.
For a skeptic, you certainly seem to be doing your reading.
Outside of a few of those, I don't recognize what you're talking about.
Apparently you've become a UFO expert in being so desperate to destroy
the UFO theory. For the record, however, what's to say they're NOT all
that? What's to say all the evidence we've gathered is wrong?
>I find it interesting you list only two
>#physical explainations, and try to blame the rest on
>misinterpritation or
>#"stupidicy"
>
>It is interesting that you don't understand the meaning of the etc.!
Again, I see that the debunkers sink to attacks.
The use of the word "etc." is irrelevant. In most writing, you
try to stress your strongest cases with what you don't classify under the
"etc." In other words, you stressed the mental causes. That was my point
entirely.
I suppose now would be my opportunity to ask-Why do you spend so
much time and effort trying to destroy theories others believe? What do
you gain from it? Does it hurt you that we believe in UFOs? Gee, I wonder
where all this conspiracy stuff has come from. I don't believe in all of
it, but with die-hard debunkers like yourself it's easy to see where it
came from.
Grantland
> Two relatively independant believers of this general
>type (not way members, but eager for indoctrination by aliens)
>are Schwann and Grantland. Both are from South Africa. When
>Doctress Neutopia went over there he evidently told her that
>Shantytowns are of no interest. Grantland is accusing "equal
>opportunity" of causing the death of the west, but seems to
>have had no problem with formal apartheid.
I strongly reject the countriest manner in which you insist on
stereotyping individuals simply on the quasi-fascist assumption that
the nature and intrinsic worth of an individual can be in any way be
determined by their geographical accident of birth.
Grantland
"Unbending intent and impeccability of spirit."
Defeat is just one -an- other obstacle in the tedious path to Victory.
FORGET about Socialism - it's Dead!
FUCK the CDA!
Whoever said senility doesn't have to be interesting, Ggregor?
Grantland
Mark
> The best cure is to ignore them and hope that their Messiah "Carl Sagan"
> can help his "flock" find the light --- of Jupiter!!
I can find Jupiter just fine. Why don't you come forth with some
evidence? Expect more and more de-bunkers to shoot holes into your
"theories" unless proof is presented. Until then give it a rest.
Mark
Phil Boyd Studge
<mat...@uoknor.edu> wrote:
> Again, I see that the debunkers sink to attacks.
I personally don't believe Twitch to be a debunker just a sceptic. He has
claimed some bona-fides from a career that includes working with a
security clearance. That means he understands the rigorous proof required
to prove a theory. It also means if you want to base your life on
something more than superstition you have to try and kill the theory and
demand proof. He also doesn't try and inflict his irrationality on
others. Would you rather have someone who has a firm basis in reality or
a cult leader who waves his hands in the air and doubles the sound level
of his voice to help you get your thinking right? Judging from your
treatment of Twitch I gather you'll fit nicely in the later group. Please
move to Montana as soon as possible and lock your self away.
> The use of the word "etc." is irrelevant. In most writing, you
> try to stress your strongest cases with what you don't classify under the
> "etc." In other words, you stressed the mental causes. That was my point
> entirely.
Maybe because he is covering his ass as to what interpreatation other
folks bring to the party.
I suppose now would be my opportunity to ask-Why do you spend so
> much time and effort trying to destroy theories others believe? What do
> you gain from it? Does it hurt you that we believe in UFOs? Gee, I wonder
> where all this conspiracy stuff has come from. I don't believe in all of
> it, but with die-hard debunkers like yourself it's easy to see where it
> came from.
Because I want a world that bases its interactions on reality not self
deception. And its easy to see why people like yourself are labelled true
believers. Have you read anything about William Cooper? How about the
Raelian Movement? (You know those folks with the swastika and the star of
David) How about the Ansaar organization? How about Alan Moseley and the
Aetherius Society? How about Leanne Stevens, Michael Leas, and the
Unarius group? How about Hoagland?
Can you say Cult Cargo Science? How about KOOKS? Frauds? Hoaxes? Then
you've identified a good portion of UFOOLOGY in addition to the small
percentage of highly weird occurances that for some folks if the reports
are true, have ended not in some Spielbergian fantasy but in death. Read
Vallee's Confrontations, and then read his book Revealations. And then
come back and ask your questions again. Why am I worried about people
like you? I'm afraid with your blind self deception you might someday get
some power that might influence my life. And I want no part of that.
Thats why!
PBStudge
Jonathan Waisman
> Interesting
> >> creature, the skeptopath; fortunately, extinction seems to be
> imminent.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Brian Zeiler
> >
> >
> >Au contraire, their numbers are on the rise.
>
> Yeah they're breeding like cockroaches alright! Somebody pass the can
> o' bug spray! :>
>
> Dan W.
Bug spray won't help; what the cure is, is facts. And there just aren't
any. Carl Sagan said it right: science isn't perfect, but it's the best
we have. Controlled studies, not 'belief.'
In layman's terms, "where's the beef (or aliens)?"
Brian Zeiler
> # What about the other 10%?
>
> They are unidentified. That is what the U in UFO stands for after
> all! That doesn't mean that they are greys and/or reptioids,
> Pleidians, Zetas, time travelers, from the hollow earth, or anything
> else. Just unidentified.
No, it doesn't mean they are just "unidentified", and as I've tried to
explain in recent weeks, the USAF's Bluebook Special Report #14
illustrated statistically how the unknowns differed dramatically from the
knowns and from the insufficient informations. The detail and
corroboration was invariably high, and the chi square analyses done by
the analysts at Battelle Memorial Institute showed that the probability
that the unknowns were misidentified knowns was ridiculously low.
So, the data actually annihilates the skeptic mantras about the unknowns
being of no significance.
--
Brian Zeiler
Jonathan Waisman
> explain in recent weeks, the USAF's Bluebook Special Report #14
> illustrated statistically how the unknowns differed dramatically from the
> knowns and from the insufficient informations. The detail and
> corroboration was invariably high, and the chi square analyses done by
> the analysts at Battelle Memorial Institute showed that the probability
> that the unknowns were misidentified knowns was ridiculously low.
>
> So, the data actually annihilates the skeptic mantras about the unknowns
> being of no significance.
>
> --
> Brian Zeiler
That might be true _statistically_ but it doesn't prove or even suggest
that what these 10% are seeing are alien craft. Whatever this phenomenon
_might_ be, assuming for the moment that it's not some kind of mass
delusion, as yet there is no proof that we're dealing with intelligently
navigated craft.
And _please_ don't try to use the abduction phenomenon as evidence;
people see things, hear things, then their subconscious minds go to work
to fill in the blanks. How many times have you heard about hypocondriacs
who will read some medical book or other and come down with the _exact_
symptoms they just read about and go from doctor to doctor to try to find
a cure? The human mind is a marvelous organ, but it's capable of much
deceit, often against its owner.
Jonathan Waisman
> years after they were 'done'), or that the USAF's very own commissioned
> Condon Committee through the University of Colorado concluded that the
> Trent photos were likely legitimate and that the Lakenheath radar-visual
> case was likely "a mechanical device of unknown origin" under intelligent
> control with propulsion that was inconsistent with terrestrial craft.
Uh...excuse me? I just read a file by the Condon Committee, and they
definitely feel there are no alien ships. Do the word search in
webcrawler; see for yourself.
Steve Pariseau
>twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
>>Steve McPhail <mat...@uoknor.edu> wrote:
>>>#marcu...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Marcus Hast) wrote:
>>
>>#>The swamp gas theory isn't the only info. you're just trying to
>>#>distort the facts. Swamp gas may be part of the explanation, Venus
>JEEZ - The debunkers are suffering from their yearly atmospheric
>confabulations when the planet Venus and Mars can be seen in the
>Northern Hemisphere. UFO debunkers usually come down with the hives and
>a terrible rash, (as well as shortness of brain!) This disease is known
>as Swamp-Gas-itis.
>The best cure is to ignore them and hope that their Messiah "Carl Sagan"
>can help his "flock" find the light --- of Jupiter!!
Swamp-Gas-itis? Come on Doc. Those guys have a serios case of
Cranial-Anal Inversion.
Cluster User
wai...@efn.org says...
>Bug spray won't help; what the cure is, is facts. And there just aren't
>any. Carl Sagan said it right: science isn't perfect, but it's the best
>we have.
Tell Carl I agree with him. But the question: why doesn't Carl stop talking
about it and just *do* scientific inquiry on the subject? He seems more
interested in discouraging others from doing any. There is something not
quite right with the man, some deep personality defects.
>Controlled studies, not 'belief.'
"Controlled studies"? What are you talking about, this isn't a subject
chemistry or physics- this is more like archaeology. The evidence, chunks of
metal, burn-circles, photographic, etc. are like finding bones in a quarry
and trying to build a picture of the original animal from them. Look at
paleontology- every year it seems our picture of dinosaurs is *radically*
transformed, meaning that at any given time we probably have a pretty
distorted picture of dinosaur history. And one would expect this to be the
case, because we are forced to theorize on way less evidence than we would
like- a single bone from an unidentified dinosaur, or a footprint. The hope
is that each year we get closer to the truth of what that history was like.
With UFOs, we surely have a completely distorted view of what is going also.
And the worst part of it is that all we have in the present state of theories
has come primarily through the ponderings of amateurs, because we don't have
real scientists working in the field.
>In layman's terms, "where's the beef (or aliens)?"
One thing that complicates the matter tremendously is the fact that we aren't
just dealing with "dinosaurs", or "Lucy", or even some early culture of our
own. It would appear that we are dealing with a technologically able culture.
Given that they have technology, they must certainly have some semblance of
science, and given that, they probably very aware that we would be curious or
afraid of them. The point is, it is not clear that they would normally just
go leaving "bones in the quarry" for us to pick through. Our anthropologists
try not to do that when they visit less technologically able cultures, why
would visiting alien "scientists" leave garbage behind? The *amazing* thing
is that any such technologically advanced culture would leave behind anything
at all. The fact that we are all up in arms trying to decide if they are
"real" or not, when we should be doing some serious investigation of the
evidence, shows just how threatened we are by any notion of them. It would be
as if scientists were still arguing whether or not dinosaurs roamed the land,
instead of trying to piece together the puzzle that the bones were spelling
out. Evidently, we are very afraid of what the UFO puzzle might spell. Seems
sort of cowardly.
If there are aliens visiting other worlds, I doubt we would be very special
to them; we're probably just one of a thousand adolescent cultures that isn't
prepared to cope with the idea that we aren't so damn special in this
universe.
Brian Zeiler
> That might be true _statistically_ but it doesn't prove or even suggest
> that what these 10% are seeing are alien craft.
Only somebody ignorant of the characteristics of these unknowns would say
something so groundless and devoid of reasoning. These unknowns differed
markedly from the knowns, and they were characterized as being indicative
of a physical, intelligently controlled atmospheric vehicle whose
appearance and operating characteristics precluded terrestrial origin.
> And _please_ don't try to use the abduction phenomenon as evidence;
I'm not, and abductions have nothing to do with this discussion anyway.
--
Brian Zeiler
Brian Zeiler
> Uh...excuse me? I just read a file by the Condon Committee, and they
> definitely feel there are no alien ships. Do the word search in
> webcrawler; see for yourself.
Uh... excuse ME. I've seen the Condon Committee conclusions, and if you
actually READ the reports, you would know that one of the problems with
the conclusion is that it was written by one person, Dr. Condon, who
caused several other members to resign in disgrace for blathering about
how fanatically skeptical he was before the investigation even began.
People who have READ the report know that his conclusions are totally
irrelevant to the actual content of the case analyses. The committee
examining the Trent photos and the Lakenheath case, for instance,
concluded very positively. The Lakenheath case was the one where they
said it was likely a physical object under intelligent control, though
they didn't have much to say about how the performance obviously
precluded any 1956 technology (or 1996, at that).
So, I would suggest that *you* do a little more in-depth analysis and
read the committees' research.
--
Brian Zeiler
Andrea Chen
>So, the data actually annihilates the skeptic mantras about the unknowns
>being of no significance.
There are no unknowns Brian. I already told you the source. But you
wouldn't believe me. And no matter how many times I tell you, you
will still think it a joke. That's the way you've been programmed.
-ac-
Andrea Chen
>I'm not, and abductions have nothing to do with this discussion anyway.
Be careful Brian. You don't want to tempt them. Remember they first
come to you in your dreams.
-ac-
Brian Zeiler
> There are no unknowns Brian. I already told you the source. But you
> wouldn't believe me. And no matter how many times I tell you, you
> will still think it a joke. That's the way you've been programmed.
Oh yeah, I forgot about the dastardly knights templar with their stolen
alien balloon technology... have another hit...
--
Brian Zeiler
Andrea Chen
>Andrea Chen wrote:
The thing is Brian that my theories make more sense than yours.
Lighter than air vehicles have a sounder scientific base than
these worm holes you were claiming kept popping up all over the
place to let the aliens get in from another galaxy. And as for
the evil knights templar the only difference between my conspiracy
theories and yours is that mine are less mainstream. Incidently
I don't need drugs to have a good time, but I honestly hope that
you are on them. Dean told me that you offered to invest the
NSA retirement fund if only he would reveal some top secret
information about aliens. If you weren't on drugs when you wrote
that letter, you need help fast.
-ac-
p.s. Don't forget how you were taking that remote vieweing stuff
real seriously. Just think they might be watching your very thoughts
as you read this. Happy dreams.
p.p.s. By any chance have you been talking to this guy Steve
Boursy? He's also claiming that I have multiple identities
all over the net (even accused me of being Doctress Neutopia).
I think he and his partners are getting ready to claim that I'm
part of some vast censorship conspiracy designed to keep the
"Usenet cabal" in power. If you haven't talked to him, you really
should. Maybe you guys could compare notes and stuff. Lately
he's been crossposting stuff to alt.society.neutopia so if you
want to get in touch, you can check it out.
twi...@hub.ofthe.net
#twi...@hub.ofthe.net wrote:
#> # What about the other 10%?
#>
#> They are unidentified. That is what the U in UFO stands for after
#> all! That doesn't mean that they are greys and/or reptioids,
#> Pleidians, Zetas, time travelers, from the hollow earth, or
anything
#> else. Just unidentified.
#No, it doesn't mean they are just "unidentified", and as I've tried
to
#explain in recent weeks, the USAF's Bluebook Special Report #14
#illustrated statistically how the unknowns differed dramatically from
the
#knowns and from the insufficient informations.
<snip>
Brian, they are still just unidentifieds! While the statistics
differ, it doesn't mean that they are identifieds. They are still
UFOs.
#So, the data actually annihilates the skeptic mantras about the
unknowns
#being of no significance.
Who published this mantra and where can I read it, Brian? All I've
said is that they are unknowns. Which they are.
#--
#Brian Zeiler
(Brian, politely emailed me this to ensure that I received it, as he
knows of my erratic ISP. )
Twi...@hub.ofthe.net
Dr. Richard X. Frager
>...evidence? Expect more and more de-bunkers...
Well yes, one of the major rules of the debunker is "Don't bother me
with the facts - my mind is made up.!"
Of course, you make the Klassic mistake of the debunker. Our job isn't
to prove it to the debunkers. Your job is to prove it to yourself!!
Good luck, but I expect your mind is made up already!!
>
Brian Zeiler
> Brian, they are still just unidentifieds! While the statistics
> differ, it doesn't mean that they are identifieds. They are still
> UFOs.
Right, but the KEY component here is that the data support UFOs being a
unique, singular phenomenon. They are unidentified, but they're likely
in their own class and are NOT misidentifications.
> Who published this mantra and where can I read it, Brian? All I've
> said is that they are unknowns. Which they are.
This is the USAF's Project Bluebook Special Report #14, available through
interlibrary loan at any large campus library.
--
Brian Zeiler
Dean Adams
Brian Zeiler <bdze...@students.wisc.edu> wrote:
>Jonathan Waisman wrote:
>> That might be true _statistically_ but it doesn't prove or even suggest
>> that what these 10% are seeing are alien craft.
>
>Only somebody ignorant of the characteristics of these unknowns would say
>something so groundless and devoid of reasoning.
Bullshit. There are absolutely no solid grounds for
claiming "unknowns" are alien spaceships. At least no
grounds other than gullible believer predisposition.
Harry H Conover
:
: People who have READ the report know that his conclusions are totally
Oh my Gawd, that's one awesome data filter you have working for you
there, Brian.
It's no wonder you chose business over science. You've got a golden
opportunity awaiting you in used cars. :-)
Harry C.
Brian Zeiler
>
> Brian Zeiler (bdze...@students.wisc.edu) wrote:
> :
> : People who have READ the report know that his conclusions are totally
> : irrelevant to the actual content of the case analyses.
>
> Oh my Gawd, that's one awesome data filter you have working for you
> there, Brian.
More idiotic commentary from the UFO equivalent of Harry Caray. What I
said about the Condon conclusions are 100% true and verifiable. Dr.
Condon himself wrote the conclusion that said little scientific value can
come of studying UFO reports, but the subcommittees and concurrently the
AIAA reached drastically different conclusions. In short, Condon's
conclusions did not reflect the independent conclusions of his own
subcommittees, and his scandalous public comments undermined his own
objectivity.
But of course, you'd know this if you actually KNEW what we were talking
about. Oh, I forgot... you read a Menger contactee book once, so clearly
you're the expert.
--
Brian Zeiler
Brian Zeiler
> Bullshit. There are absolutely no solid grounds for
> claiming "unknowns" are alien spaceships. At least no
> grounds other than gullible believer predisposition.
Actually, the USAF statistics illustrate that UFOs are a unique, singular
phenomenon. No gullible believer predisposition is necessary to apply
accepted statistical inference techniques to this data set, and Battelle
Memorial Institute gave us this data and the analysis. So, now that we
see that UFOs are likely a unique phenomenon, the question is WHAT are
they.
Analyses by Dr. Hynek, Dr. McDonald, the KGB, the UK's intelligence, the
USAF's Condon Committee, the USAF's Project Sign, and the AIAA all agreed
that this unique phenomenon is characterized by physical disk-shaped
vehicles under intelligent control that could not have been manufactured
on this planet. Again, no "gullible believer predisposition" is
necessary for these conclusions. In fact, Dr. Hynek and Dr. McDonald
strike me as more intelligent than you, more exposed to the data than
you, more objective than you, and more highly credentialed than you. One
might say that YOU are the one with the predisposition, one of fanatical
nihilism (or so you'd have us think).
--
Brian Zeiler
Andrea Chen
>Actually, the USAF statistics illustrate that UFOs are a unique, singular
>phenomenon.
There's those words again.
>In fact, Dr. Hynek and Dr. McDonald
>strike me as more intelligent than you, more exposed to the data than
>you, more objective than you, and more highly credentialed than you. One
>might say that YOU are the one with the predisposition, one of fanatical
>nihilism (or so you'd have us think).
Dean would like to have us think? This implies that Dean might be
(Gasp!) a CIA (or is it NSA or NRO or DIA this week?) disinfo
psyop. Now given this assumption how do you know that Hynek and
MacDonald were exposed to more data? It would seem that a disinfo
agent might have the "real truth" in order to know which stories
to discredit most forcefully.
So which is is it? Is Dean an ignorant clod or a SeKRet PSiOP
Sp00k?
If Dean is a spook, then why don't you publish some "proof" like
you did on the nonexistence of Louis Nick? If he's not, then
why did you put that suggestive question at the end of your
piece. Do you know that Huffy and some friends have been
arguing for physical violence against disinfo agents over in
the Groom Lake group? Charges such as those you make casually
could get someone hurt by someone even kookier than you. Thank
the Goddess I managed to convince you that I'm not one of
those nefarious govt coverup artists. Or have you changed your
mind on this. I'm never quite certain where you stand on such
things.
-ac-
Jonathan Waisman
> as if scientists were still arguing whether or not dinosaurs roamed the land,
> instead of trying to piece together the puzzle that the bones were spelling
> out. Evidently, we are very afraid of what the UFO puzzle might spell. Seems
> sort of cowardly.
>
> If there are aliens visiting other worlds, I doubt we would be very special
> to them; we're probably just one of a thousand adolescent cultures that isn't
> prepared to cope with the idea that we aren't so damn special in this
> universe.
Some people may feel threatened, as you indicate. Others might just feel
we don't have enough evidence to begin to guess at what it is we're
investigating. I'm sure there was a point prior to the discovery of the
dinosaur where people were confused and didn't know what the implication
of all those bones was. People are seeing things; what are the
implications? Some say it implies alien species. Is that proven? Okay,
it's a theory. Theories are a dime a dozen; what they need are controlled
studies done by disciplined scientists to prove them. In the analogy you
make with dinosaur bones, that would not be possible, but there was much
digging and testing of layers of rock with new technology.
Is there an equivalent with UFOs? Who's doing it? All I see or hear are
people who are bantering back and forth, getting nowhere in the process.
And to make matters even worse (as if they could get worse) there are
literally hoards of "investigators" who are clearly in it just for the
money and/or fame it brings them.
Back to square one: where's the beef?
Greg Alt
fail to see what it has to do with serving vegetarian food to the
homeless as anarchist direct action.
Now, I realize the FBI is paying you guys big bucks to disrupt FNB
and confuse possible new activists, but how about you just tell them
to shove it, and keep the crossposts out of alt.org.food-not-bombs?
Ya think you can do that?
Greg